This patch adds a missing line after the declaration and
fixes the checkpatch warning:
WARNING: Missing a blank line after declarations
+ int desc;
+ for (desc = 0; desc < LTQ_DESC_NUM; desc++)
Signed-off-by: Aleksander Jan Bajkowski <[email protected]>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/lantiq_etop.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/lantiq_etop.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/lantiq_etop.c
index 072391c494ce..78257cbe7fb6 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/lantiq_etop.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/lantiq_etop.c
@@ -218,6 +218,7 @@ ltq_etop_free_channel(struct net_device *dev, struct ltq_etop_chan *ch)
free_irq(ch->dma.irq, priv);
if (IS_RX(ch->idx)) {
int desc;
+
for (desc = 0; desc < LTQ_DESC_NUM; desc++)
dev_kfree_skb_any(ch->skb[ch->dma.desc]);
}
--
2.30.2
Hello:
This patch was applied to netdev/net-next.git (master)
by Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>:
On Tue, 28 Dec 2021 23:00:31 +0100 you wrote:
> This patch adds a missing line after the declaration and
> fixes the checkpatch warning:
>
> WARNING: Missing a blank line after declarations
> + int desc;
> + for (desc = 0; desc < LTQ_DESC_NUM; desc++)
>
> [...]
Here is the summary with links:
- [net-next] net: lantiq_etop: add blank line after declaration
https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/4c46625bb586
You are awesome, thank you!
--
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html
(adding John Crispin, the original submitter of this driver)
On Tue, 2021-12-28 at 23:00 +0100, Aleksander Jan Bajkowski wrote:
> This patch adds a missing line after the declaration and
> fixes the checkpatch warning:
>
> WARNING: Missing a blank line after declarations
> + int desc;
> + for (desc = 0; desc < LTQ_DESC_NUM; desc++)
>
> Signed-off-by: Aleksander Jan Bajkowski <[email protected]>
[]
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/lantiq_etop.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/lantiq_etop.c
[]
> @@ -218,6 +218,7 @@ ltq_etop_free_channel(struct net_device *dev, struct ltq_etop_chan *ch)
> free_irq(ch->dma.irq, priv);
> if (IS_RX(ch->idx)) {
> int desc;
> +
> for (desc = 0; desc < LTQ_DESC_NUM; desc++)
> dev_kfree_skb_any(ch->skb[ch->dma.desc]);
> }
The change is innocuous and has already been applied but the code
doesn't seem to make sense.
Why is dev_kfree_skb_any called multiple times with the same argument?
Is there some missing logic here? Maybe a missing ++?
Something like:
for (desc = 0; desc < LTQ_DESC_NUM; desc++)
dev_kfree_skb_any(ch->skb[ch->dma.desc++]);
Dunno, but the current code seems wrong.
Hi Joe,
On 1/8/22 09:04, Joe Perches wrote:
> (adding John Crispin, the original submitter of this driver)
>
> On Tue, 2021-12-28 at 23:00 +0100, Aleksander Jan Bajkowski wrote:
>> This patch adds a missing line after the declaration and
>> fixes the checkpatch warning:
>>
>> WARNING: Missing a blank line after declarations
>> + int desc;
>> + for (desc = 0; desc < LTQ_DESC_NUM; desc++)
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Aleksander Jan Bajkowski <[email protected]>
> []
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/lantiq_etop.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/lantiq_etop.c
> []
>> @@ -218,6 +218,7 @@ ltq_etop_free_channel(struct net_device *dev, struct ltq_etop_chan *ch)
>> free_irq(ch->dma.irq, priv);
>> if (IS_RX(ch->idx)) {
>> int desc;
>> +
>> for (desc = 0; desc < LTQ_DESC_NUM; desc++)
>> dev_kfree_skb_any(ch->skb[ch->dma.desc]);
>> }
>
> The change is innocuous and has already been applied but the code
> doesn't seem to make sense.
>
> Why is dev_kfree_skb_any called multiple times with the same argument?
>
> Is there some missing logic here? Maybe a missing ++?
>
> Something like:
>
> for (desc = 0; desc < LTQ_DESC_NUM; desc++)
> dev_kfree_skb_any(ch->skb[ch->dma.desc++]);
>
> Dunno, but the current code seems wrong.
>
>
FYI: This driver is mainly used by OpenWRT. OpenWRT has two
patches that were never upstreamed. One of them is called
"various etop fixes" and I would expect more bugs in this driver.
The part that adds support for ar9 must be rewritten before
upstreaming. This SoC has a built-in 2 port switch and needs
a DSA driver. The rest of the fixes in this patch can probably
be sent upstream.
1. https://github.com/abajk/openwrt/blob/master/target/linux/lantiq/patches-5.10/0028-NET-lantiq-various-etop-fixes.patch
2. https://github.com/abajk/openwrt/blob/master/target/linux/lantiq/patches-5.10/0701-NET-lantiq-etop-of-mido.patch